I am looking forward to getting a fitbit bracelet. I hope to lose some of my belly with a device that will encourage me to move more. I can see how the demand of small rechargeable batteries will grow over the next few years for wearable electronics. We all want more of these devices.
Back in the 20th Century people had self-winding watches that used the normal activity of the day to power the watch. I've seen proposals to use the same self-winding pendulum mechanism to drive a generator to power wearable electronics. That sounds a lot better than having to keep all those batteries charged.
It seems particularly silly to me that a device that is supposed to be used for exercising cannot use the power generated by that exercise. Today I saw a couple of guys training using stationary bicycles. They had music playing... on a battery-operated player. Also, this was outside with plenty of solar energy going unused.
Yes may be you are right, but this will really bring forward many new formats of batteries, once the life of battery is over that will call the end of the life of the device as well, as in so many different formats of batteries does not allow the replacements possible. Same thing happens with Bluetooth headsets once the life of battery is over; your device is also gone.
In real these devices are not really necessary for the people who are good at keeping themselvs healthy. The whole wearable market at present attracts the 99% buyers who are more show-off rathar than the real purpose.
Regarding battery life, if a battery is capable of sustaining 5,000-10,000 charging/discharging cycles without any significant performance degradation then the battery will be good for a natural life of the device. So, its more important to give more battery time for device even if it would mean a non-removal battery.
Yes, large charge/discharge cycle is a very valuable and important element of battery if it is used as a no removable battery, and this is still a matter of research for battery manufacturers but by the time they achieve there is no point in designing equipment with non replaceable batteries.
@electrnx_lyf, I have to disagree with you on this one. Don't get me wrong, it is true that many of the people that do have adopted wearable technology do so more to show off than for anything else but they are a small portion of the entire wearable technology market. Some of the devices such as the wearable heart monitor could help save a life. Others, such as Google Glass, have immense applications and will definitely prove to be indispensable over the next few years.
@ CEO, I think you are right, once the life of battery is over that will mean that the device will be useless. Therefore, I am for the notion that wearable electronic devices should be self powered IMO.
Companies should work more on producing self powered devices rather than producing many devices that does not last over and over again.
When it comes to the consumer electronic market, lithium battery revenue has speedily risen. Fashion has made wearable electronics demand to rise and this has helped much in the rapid growth of lithium battery production. Many companies have emerged and have heavily invested in the market of wearable electronics. Wearable technology requires batteries with longer lives and this will be a major concern for manufacturers if growth in revenue is to be sustained.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.